A hyperlink into or within a timed document may cause a seek of the current presentation time or may activate an element (if it is not in violation of any timing model rules).

19:43:39 [Ian]

TBL: But this won't retrofit to 10 billion existing web pages.

19:43:40 [Ian]

q-

19:43:58 [Ian]

RF proposal:

19:44:11 [Ian]

- Given lack of any other assertions, you can assume that a URI refers to a document.

19:44:33 [Ian]

RF: You are saying that because you don't have a default, therefore the entire HTTP namespace should be your lowest common denominator.

19:44:56 [Ian]

Seconded.

19:45:02 [TBray]

third

19:45:28 [ChrisL]

zakim, pick a chair

19:45:29 [Zakim]

I don't understand 'pick a chair', ChrisL. Try /msg Zakim help

19:45:36 [Ian]

q?

19:45:37 [DaveO]

queue?

19:46:10 [Roy]

q+

19:46:30 [Ian]

TB: A URI is a string you can compare. An HTTP URI can be dereferenced. The Web arch doesn't allow you to know what the resource is. This is why RDF is a good thing. Allows you to make such assertions.

19:46:31 [DaveO]

how do we ACK the queue?

19:46:36 [Ian]

ack TBray

19:46:38 [DanC]

ack tbray

19:47:01 [DanC]

DaveO, when I get the floor, can I discuss with TimBL?

19:47:04 [Ian]

TB: Once you have RDF, I still don't see why you need to limit the range of HTTP URIs or other URI schemes.

19:47:09 [Ian]

ack ChrisL

19:47:15 [DaveO]

Dan, sure.

19:47:16 [DanC]

my car is on the web.

19:47:24 [Ian]

CL: The car is a physical object, but it's not on the web. the concept is a title but is not on the web.

19:47:31 [Ian]

CL: You can point to the concept of "title".

19:47:40 [Ian]

CL: If you can point to "title", you can point to "car".

19:47:58 [Ian]

CL: I don't think you can point to a "title". You can point to a document where people say what they mean by title.

19:48:48 [Ian]

CL: Even with "#" you are pointing to a piece of a document. That piece may be an assertion. But could be pulled out and put in its own document, and I could refer to it without a "#".

19:48:54 [Ian]

q?

19:49:37 [Ian]

DC: You can always use the URI for a Web page. If the Webmaster has also said that that URI identifies a car, that's fine.

19:49:48 [Ian]

TBL: When I do an HTTP transaction, can I store the results in RDF?

19:49:49 [Ian]

DC: Yes.

19:50:07 [Ian]

DC: In the example of my Web page, the Web page is a car.

19:50:11 [TBray]

q+

19:50:28 [Ian]

TBL: What if a Web page talks about another Web page that talks about a car?

RF: you are saying - give me a representation of this resource through wais.

19:59:12 [ChrisL]

(this is the general gatewaying problem, which was established at Cern)

19:59:35 [Ian]

DO: This is a point that has been skirted around -use of proxies.

19:59:45 [Ian]

DO: Could RF write up something on proxies?

20:00:24 [Ian]

RF: I will read TBL's doc first.

20:00:28 [Ian]

ack TBray

20:01:16 [Ian]

TB: Suppose I believe that DC's car URI really denotes DC's car. Suppose I write a bunch of stuff in RDF about the car, and I have a carfinder service online to sift among cars out there. All that is logical and self-coherent and causes no heartburn.

20:01:49 [Ian]

TB: Suppose RF doesn't believe it's a car but the URI identifies a Web page. He writes a bunch of other RDF that talks about the Web page.

20:02:11 [Ian]

TB: Our assertions are not interoperable but could be bridged with some metadata. But at the end of the day, so what?

20:02:31 [Ian]

TB: The idea that you will have universal agreement on what is identified is a chimera.

20:02:40 [Ian]

TB: But what's the difference?

20:02:54 [ChrisL]

(sounds like "do we assume all assertions are true")

20:03:26 [Ian]

TB: If we need to work together, we will do the work to understand each other.

20:03:30 [ChrisL]

q+

20:03:54 [Ian]

TBL: Cataclysmic interoperability problem is the heartburn.

20:04:03 [Ian]

TB: That's the reality of life. You can't make it go away.

20:04:16 [TimBL]

You CAN

20:04:55 [Roy]

given any identifier, I can make a webpage out of it

20:05:21 [Ian]

TB: Another spin: suppose I want to make assertions that the Web page is a standin for W3C. Are Josh's views and mine that inconsistent? Perhaps on the surface, and we would need to work together. But I don't believe this problem can go away.

20:05:41 [Ian]

TBL: You can make it go away. You can merge data when using same ontologies.

(On the contrary it does mean that TimBL's stuff breaks when Roy's data is introduced)

20:10:20 [Roy]

then it is already too broken to use

20:10:42 [DaveO]

q?

20:10:49 [DanC]

DanC has joined #tagmem

20:10:51 [Ian]

DC: TimBL wants a guarantee that someone will never find a car at the other end.

20:11:28 [DanC]

it's not "I can't know that". TimBL's saying "I consider that false."

20:11:38 [Ian]

RF: You need RDF to know what my URI identifies.

20:11:55 [Ian]

RF: If you want to be able to reason using this URI in an unambiguous manner, then you will need more information.

20:12:24 [Ian]

IJ: Then what does it mean that a URI means the same thing in any context?

20:12:30 [ChrisL]

isn't this an arcrole to say how much dereferencing is happening?

20:12:51 [Ian]

TBL: In general, there is an axiom that a URI identifies one thing in all cases.

20:12:51 [DanC]

I don't believe that axiom any more, btw, timbl.

20:13:08 [Ian]

TBL: If you use a URI in a relationship, it can indirectly refer to other things.

20:13:14 [Ian]

ack Ian

20:13:19 [ChrisL]

except in the trivial case - it identifies the resource that you get by dereferencing it

20:13:32 [DanC]

Chris, that's one (coherent) position: there are different ways to point. *p vs **p, in a sense.

20:13:41 [TimBL]

Roy has said that he can't use TimBL's scheme because proxies won't work because he thinks tim's system has no difference between document an representation, but there he i swrong, presumbably because he hasn't read TimBL's stuff yet.

20:14:12 [ChrisL]

arcrole of "the organisation that published this page"

20:14:13 [Ian]

TB: I suggest we publish the logs and stand back and see what happens on wwwt-ag.

20:14:41 [ChrisL]

as opposed to, say, arcrole of "the isp that hosts this page" or any other such arc role

DC: If you write href="~...", the client better put a "~" byte on the wire, and not a %7e

20:22:38 [ChrisL]

once it goes over the wire?

20:22:43 [TimBL]

q?

20:23:09 [Ian]

TB: Regardless of this, I think we can easily achieve consensus that it's worthwhile to make this point in the arch document. And make the point that for max interoperability, don't %-escape unless you have to, and use lowercase when you do.

20:24:13 [Ian]

DC: If someone gives you a URI, don't screw with it.

20:24:34 [Ian]

TB: Maybe not true: If a user types in a URI that has a space, then you are required to %20 that.

20:24:48 [Ian]

DC: But in that case, the user didn't give a URI.

20:25:32 [Ian]

TB: Right - if given a URI, don't scree with it. if composing a URI, there are cases where must escape things, others where shouldn't, and if given a percent-escape, don't screw with.

20:26:21 [Ian]

CL: You percent-escape Kanji as late as possible.

20:27:08 [Ian]

DC: Spaces and Kanji characters -are they in scope here?

20:27:15 [Ian]

CL: I'm happy to co-write a finding with Martni.

20:28:27 [Ian]

q?

20:28:39 [Ian]

RF: The href attribute is CDATA (or whatever).

20:28:51 [ChrisL]

anyURI

20:29:12 [Ian]

RF: The attribute value has to be translated from xml entities to something that looks like a URI. If there's a space into it, it needs to be translated into a URI first.

20:29:40 [Ian]

DC: Test case: two documents fed to an xslt processor. One has space, the other %20. The namespaces spec says that these are URi references.

20:30:08 [Ian]

DC: One guy spells the namespace name with 7-bits, the other with more.

20:30:34 [Ian]

RF: Mozilla treats space as illegal char. IE treats as auto-conversion to %2e (for href's in general). IE sends out the space over the wire.

20:30:44 [TimBL]

I have a feeling that there will probably some situation where the TAG has to say: stop, do it differently.

20:31:30 [Ian]

TBL: What's the next step? Continue from here? Or have someone go off and work on it?

20:31:32 [DanC]

my test case is from a question of interpretatoin sent to the XML Core wg (via xml-names-editor or xml-editor or some such).

20:31:48 [TimBL]

Maybe we bneed a set of test cases.

20:32:02 [Roy]

that should be %20

20:32:52 [DanC]

(I'm not sure about my "if you mean the same thing, say it the same way" position, now that we get into the IRI territory)

20:32:53 [Ian]

CL: I'd like to see whether the "character model of the web" says this.